Glass. 
 
 Book -^vr3 
 
<^^ yC-^ ./ cA. 
 
 '^"'"'''-^/^-^ --rr-S^ 
 
 ANALYSIS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 THIRD ARTICLE 
 
 OS 
 
 THE TREATY 
 
 o* 
 
 CESSION OF LOUISIANA, 
 
 
 
■V 
 
ANALYSIS, drc. 
 
 ^ IMPRESSED with a sense of 
 
 '^lively gratitude for the generosity with which 
 "-the committee of the House of Representatives, 
 r^from pure regard for our natural rights, pro- 
 ::^ poses to extend to the Louisianians the blessings 
 of self government : feeling, as we ought to feel, 
 the happiness of being attached by indissoluble ties 
 to a nation, whose unalterable principles of human 
 justice secure to us the enjoyment of those inappre- 
 ciable advantages, which true liberty, in vain 
 sought for in other countries, bestows on this pri- 
 vileged portion of mankind, we should attempt to 
 utter no expression but that of our thanks and of our 
 affection, were we not convinced that our stipulated 
 rights still require some attention. Considering, 
 therefore, that our duty bids us to insist on those 
 rights, injustice to the important trust which our 
 constituents have deposited in our hands, we will 
 take the liberty of analyzing the third article of the 
 treaty of cession of Louisiana. 
 
 The third article of the treaty of cession of Lou- 
 isiana is not, we humbly conceive, vague, in- 
 definite and obscure ; it is pointed, it is mani- 
 fest, it is explicit. The terms of it are as follows: 
 *' The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be 
 *' incorporated into the union of the United 
 " States, and admitted as soon as possible, accord- 
 " ing to the principles of the federal constitution, 
 " to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and 
 *' immunities of citizens of the United States ; and 
 
( 4 ) 
 
 ** in the mean time, they shall be maintained and 
 
 . ** protc<Sted in the free enjoj-ment of their liberty, 
 
 *' property, and the religion Avhich ihey profess." 
 
 We shall now divide this phrase into three 
 parts: 
 
 1st. The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall 
 be incorporated into the union. 
 
 2d» They shall be incorporated as soon as possi- 
 ble. 
 
 3d. They shall be incorporated according to the 
 principles of the constitution. 
 
 On the first we say that by the inhabitants of the 
 ceded territory are expressly meant the inhabitants 
 i/jcn exist'uig in the territory, because Fraiice had 
 no right to stipulate the incorporation oith^ future 
 citizens of Louisiana ; we sny that the inhabitants, 
 who have been annexed to the Uni:ed States by the 
 treaiy, are those in favour of whom the clause has 
 been made, that consequently any condition de- 
 pending on future circumstances oui;ht to be inad- 
 missible, because it would expose the inhabitants, 
 ^bo existed in Louisiana at the time the treaty 
 *was madt^ to be kept out of the enjoyment of 
 rights which have been stipulated yor them. 
 
 Second. \. These inhabitants are to be incor- 
 porate!! into the union as soon i: . possible. What 
 '^'mean the words as soon as possible^ say many per- 
 sons ? They are v.igue, tliey are indefinite. We 
 coniend that they are clear and explicit. What- 
 ever may be the constru6\ion which may be "uague- 
 ly apr lied to them, nol)ody can deny that the words 
 as s on as possible signify ivitbout any unnecessary 
 delay. Therefore ai.y delay, which is not indis- 
 pensable, is dire^ly 'opposite to the spirit of the 
 sti|)ulation. But what is this indispensable de- 
 lav .^ It is cle irly that whi'h cannot be avoid- 
 ed ; it is the lapse of time during which pre- 
 parations are made lo come to the execution ; it is 
 
( 5 ) 
 
 a delay which does not depend on the will of par- 
 ties, which admits of no arhitiary prolongation, 
 but is occasioned by an adinal c^oidcnt impossibili- 
 ty of doing the thing sooner. 
 
 Thirdly. The inhabitants annexed to the Uni- 
 ted States by the treaty, arc to be incorporated in- 
 to the ur.ion according to the principles of the fe- 
 deral constitut. on. These expressions, instead of 
 admitting of any doubts, liave been introduced to 
 prevent them. The incorporation of the Louisiani- 
 ans being a new case unl re.-ieen by tite framers of 
 the constitution, it was indispensable to say how 
 it was to take place. It is to take place then 
 according to the principles of the constitution^ or 
 in other words perfc6lly similar, on the same pi in- 
 ciples by ivhich the constitution has regulated the 
 rights of the indi-vidual states^ and of the citizens 
 of the United States in their relation ivith the fede- 
 ral goi)ernment. Nothing can be clearer than thi:t 
 this part of the stipulation is intended to absimilate 
 the Louisianians to the other citizens ol the United 
 States. The novelty of the case requ'ied that ex- 
 planation ; and that explanation has been introduc- 
 ed precisely to avoid leaving any doubts respecting 
 that pe' feet assimilation. 
 
 To resume, we say that the stipulation of the 
 treaty is evidently the same as if it had been ex- 
 pressed in the following terms : 
 
 " The inhabitants, who are annexed to the 
 " United States, by this treaty, shall he ineorpo- 
 *' rated into the union, without any unnecessary 
 " delay, on the same principles by which the fe- 
 " deral constitution has regulated the rights of the 
 *' individual states, and of the citizens of the 
 ♦' United States." 
 
 That we conceive to be the clear, indeed the 
 only construction, which can satisfy judgment), 
 reason and justice. 
 
( <5 ) 
 
 Many persons, on the pretended obscurity 
 of this stipuhition, seera to have gop'^ too far. 
 Son.e say thiit tlie incorporation of the Louisi- 
 anians cannot bs executed ^v'ithout the con- 
 sent of the individual states, because there is no 
 provision in the constitution that authorises that 
 incorporation. Others, taking local rules for con- 
 stitutional laws, pretend that there are certain re- 
 i^uJations whicli prevent the incorporation of the 
 Louisianians, until they are more numerous than 
 at present; others maintain that they must be na- 
 turalized according to the rules established for the 
 individuals who come into the United States, all 
 which ccnstructions do not only tend to darken 
 ivhat is clear, but go directly to annul the Sd arti- 
 cle of the treaty of cession of Louisiana, as we 
 shall hereafter prove. 
 
 In the first place, to ask the consent of the indi- 
 vidual states for the incorporation of the Louisia- 
 jjians, after that condition has been accepted and 
 ratilied by the federal government, is putting in the 
 power of the states individually to destroy what 
 iheir federal goven^.ment has done. If such a step 
 was necessary, it oughf to have been made previ- 
 ous to the ratification. Now it is too late, and now 
 it would be exposing the federal government to a 
 dilemma truly afliiCling for a government founded 
 on justice, that of breaking their promise. 
 
 The objection to the incorporation of the Loui- 
 sianians until they have acquired a more numerous 
 population, is another groundless difficulty, which 
 goes to annul the third stipulation of the treaty. 
 That stipulation as we have already said, is 
 made in favor of the inhabitants who are an- 
 nexed to the United States by the treaty, of 
 the inhabitants in whose behalf France had 
 a right to stipulate, not in favor of any future 
 population. If there had been certain rules ac- 
 
( 7 ) 
 
 cordiiii^ to which a certain population of any pari 
 of the United States, could claim admission into 
 the union, it was not necessar}' to stipulate it. It 
 would have been a matter of course. But the con- 
 stitution fixes no such bounds, expresses no such 
 condition. '^ New states may be admitted by Con- 
 gress into this union," are the only expressions 
 which can be found in the constitution relative to 
 this subject. 
 
 To pretend that the Louisianians must be natu- 
 ralized according to the rules established for aliea 
 individuals, who come into the United Stares, is 
 also an ssertion, which tends to annul the 3rd ar- 
 ticle of the t''eaty of cession of Louisiana. There 
 is not a Lousianian who could not enjoy the be- 
 nefit of t '^^ alien law in the United States, previous 
 to the treaty of cession of Louisiana. What 
 then has that treaty secured to him ? Is it the ad- 
 vantage which he could acquire without it ? Does 
 it go no further than stipulating that the Louisia- 
 nians shall be treated as all aliens of all countries, 
 who can becontC citizens of the United States, 
 without any stipulation ? Strange indeed is such 
 a difficulty ! And the more strange as it comes 
 after Congress has already decided it, by imparting 
 to the Louisianians some of the most precious ad- 
 vantages of citizenship, and admitted many of 
 them to the oath of allegiance and fulfilment of 
 public trusts, which none but citizens of the Uni- 
 ted States can hold. 
 
 Thus we see that any construction of the 3d 
 article of the treaty of cession of Louisiana, which 
 deviates from the plain, the simple, the just sense 
 of it, augments the embarrassment, instead of elu- 
 cidating the subject. 
 
 Let us repeat it once more : 
 
 *' The inhabitants, who are annexed to the Uni- 
 *' ted States by the treaty, are to be incorporated 
 
( 8 ) 
 
 *' into the union, without any unnecessary delay, 
 *' o\ the same principles by which the constituiiou 
 *' has reg^ulated the rig-hts of the iiK-ividual states 
 " and of the citizens of the United States." 
 
 Such IS the constru6lion which tlic Louisiani- 
 ans have conceived to be the plain( st. Bur, 
 while we are defending their rigliis, let it nor be 
 supposed that we are presumptuous en .igh to be- 
 lieve that our e:xpianation was necessary. Parties 
 must expound their claims before their judges, 
 though th' y know them to be more enlightened 
 than themselves. 
 
 LE N '10